Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedCivil Application E024 of 2020· [2022] KECA 463 (KLR)

Aga Khan Education Service Kenya v Ekirapa & 10 others

Court of Appeal
18 March 2022
1,429 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed Aga Khan Education Service to file its appeal record late, accepting Covid-19 court closures as a valid explanation for the delay.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a single-judge ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi by M'inoti, JA, on a Motion dated 21st July 2020 by Aga Khan Education Service Kenya seeking extension of time to file its record of appeal out of time. The intended appeal challenges a judgment of the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi (Bor, J.) dated 28th October 2019 in ELC C No. 455 of 2008, concerning the conversion of a private education institution that had operated for over fifty years into a public institution. The applicant lodged a notice of appeal within 14 days and requested certified copies within 30 days, but the record of appeal filed on 11th June 2020 fell outside the 60-day period because the Registrar's certificate of delay excluded time only up to 16th March 2020, while the applicant received the formal letter and the proceedings in May 2020 amid the Covid-19 lock-down of the Judiciary. The court applied the Imperial Bank v Popat criteria: length of delay, reasons, prejudice, conduct, public interest and arguability. It found the delay of less than a month not inordinate and fully explained by the Covid-19 court closure; the intended appeal was not frivolous, the Court having already found it arguable and granted stay of execution on 25th September 2020; and no respondent opposed or demonstrated prejudice, the 11th respondent expressly supporting the application. The court allowed the motion, deemed the record and supplementary record filed on time, and ordered costs of the application to abide the outcome of Civil Appeal No. 229 of 2020.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the delay of less than a month in filing the record of appeal was inordinate and excusable

Holding

The delay was not inordinate and was fully and candidly explained by the Covid-19 lock-down of the Judiciary which restricted judicial services and physical access to courts.

Reasoning

The applicant filed the record on 11th June 2020, less than a month after receiving the proceedings on 12th May 2020. The Registrar's certificate of delay excluded time only up to 16th March 2020, rendering the filing out of time. The court accepted the Covid-19 court closure and the applicant's honest confusion about the computation of time as a full and candid explanation, and noted the intended appeal had already been found arguable in a stay ruling.

p. 3
02

Whether extension of time should be granted where no respondent opposes and no prejudice is shown

Holding

Extension granted; no respondent opposed the application, the only responding respondent supported it, and no prejudice was adverted to.

Reasoning

The court weighed the absence of opposition and absence of demonstrated prejudice against the respondents' interest in the judgment in their favour, balanced against the applicant's right of appeal and the public interest in the dispute over conversion of a private education institution to a public institution. The intended appeal was not frivolous, the Court having granted stay of execution on finding it arguable.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • In an application for extension of time the Court's discretion is wide and unfettered but must be exercised judiciously and on reason, not whimsically or capriciously.
  • The considerations for extension of time include length of delay, reasons for delay, prejudice, conduct of parties, balancing interests, public interest, and whether the intended appeal is frivolous.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Motion dated 21st July 2020 allowed
  2. 2.Record of appeal filed on 11th June 2020 and supplementary record of appeal filed on 25th June 2020 deemed to have been filed on time
  3. 3.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of Civil Appeal No. 229 of 2020

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Court of Appeal Rulesrule 75(2)
  • Court of Appeal Rulesrule 82(2)
  • Court of Appeal Rulesrule 82(1) proviso

Cases cited (2)

  • Moroo Polymers Ltd. v. Wilfred Kayak Willis
    [2019] eKLR

    Principles guiding extension of time applications

  • Imperial Bank Ltd (In Receivership) & Another v. Alnashir Popat & 18 Others
    [2018] eKLR

    Considerations for extension of time: delay, reasons, prejudice, conduct, public interest, arguability

On appeal from
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
ELC C No. 455 of 2008
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent discretion to extend time under the Court of Appeal Rules (rules 75(2) and 82); application for extension of time to file record of appeal

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Aga Khan Education Service Kenya v Ekirapa & 10 others", Case Analysis (2022). Civil Application E024 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2022/463/eng@2022-03-18

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.